On the groups of the Vulturidce. 581 



bare of feathers : and the bill, although weak, is rather shorter, 

 and approaches more closely to the form o{\.\i2d.oi SarcoramphuSy 

 the under mandible being straight, and the gonys being faintly 

 apparent. The tail, consisting of 12 feathers, is even. The cere 

 of these birds is much advanced in front, and the nares are situ- 

 ated at the anteriour part of it. These are oval, but extremely 

 elongated, and placed longitudinally. The Vultiir aura^ Linn., 

 the Turkey Buzzard of America, and the C. urubu, Vieill., 

 \_V. atratus, Wils.] nearly allied to it, but latterly separated by 

 M. Vieillot, and the American ornithologists, by apparently 

 good specifick characters, are the representatives of the genus. 

 This group completes the circle in which the Vultwidce are in- 

 cluded by leading round to Sarcoramphus, the other American 

 form, with which we commenced our examination of the family. 

 With that genus Cafhartes possesses a near alliance with regard 

 to its general characters, the fleshy caruncles on the bill of Sarco- 

 rainphus being excepted ; but it differs materially in the weakness 

 of all its organs, which bear no comparison with the strength and 

 powerful construction exhibited in the typical Vultures. 



Such are the leading peculiarities of form in the family of Vul- 

 turidcBf and such the mode in which they succeed each other, 

 and by which they accord more or less with the typical character. 

 New species may perhaps come in which may not agree in every 

 particular with any of the above forms, and a more accurate 



ralist, who certainly was the first to characterize the group as separate from 

 Sarcoramphus. But although M. liliger included the Vultur papa, the type 

 of Sarcoramphus, in his Cathartes, and thus rendered his genus too exten- 

 sive, yet the characters he gave it are still sufficiently applicable to the species 

 which remain to serve to distinguish them : and his name being prior, and 

 certainly better known from having been earlier adopted, is perhaps on the 

 whole to be preferred. I must here observe that the Cathartes of M. Temminck 

 [Man. p. xlviii and p. 7] is very different from that of M. lUiger. Besides the 

 species included in the genus of that naturalist, M. Temminck introduces the 

 Fultur percnopterus of Linnaeus, by which means he brings together tlie three 

 genera of his predecessours Sarcoramphus, Dum., Cathartes, 111., {^Catharhta., 

 Vieill.] and Neophron, Sav., without any reference to them. I scarcely know 

 two forms belonging to the same family more decidedly distinct from each 

 other, than those of Sarcoramphus and Neophron ; as may be seen from com- 

 paring their respective characters in the above sketch. 



